MAV Still Pursuing SB 974 Port Bridges
Here’s a story that promises to break into 90 different directions in the next 48 hours:
Try to keep up, it gets pretty confusing:
We know that MAV, after purposefully ignoring calls from State Sen. Alan Lowenthal’s office since July 6 to work out their differences, posted a “let’s work together” call to the state senator just prior to SB 974 (Lowenthal’s $30 port container fee bill) being taken off suspense (courtesy of Assembly Speaker Nunez) and passing through Assembly Appropriations.
However, just yesterday, MAV – the “man who never learns” -- made one of those, “So is it yes or is it no to my bridges?” calls to Lowenthal, who, by all appearances, told the Mayor to go pound sand at one of the nearby port-polluted beaches.
Now, wacky environmentalists have gone even wackier as word has it that the Governator (perhaps with port issues it’s better to call him the “Terminal-ator”) has reportedly stepped in and reached out to Sen. Don Perata and Lowenthal, asking for some time to smooth out the bill for the businessfolk -- who enjoy talking about working with the public as long as it doesn’t cost them a dime.
After the major screw up of recently firing the Air Resources Board Chairman for being too independent/aggressive in the global warming wars, The Terminal-ator knows his green credentials can’t take another international media hit. But, for some reason, this action hero wants to postpone action until the new year.
Sources say the wacky enviros are willing to maintain a hard line and “check everyone’s green credentials” from MAV to the Gov to the Assembly. But remember, they ARE called environmentalists…
This has the makings of a fine melodrama – or a media bloodbath somewhere along the line.
So…stay tuned for the next episode.
Will the mayor EVER learn?
Will the Terminal-ator, after selling infrastructure bonds to the public, get the tightwads at the California Chamber of Commerce to kick in a few bucks for the asthmatic kids?
Can the wacky environmentalists ever trust a “green” Governor who fired an independent air board chair for trying to “do too much” in the battle against global warming?
OR will they roll over until the new year only to jump off MAV’s new bridges?
Try to keep up, it gets pretty confusing:
We know that MAV, after purposefully ignoring calls from State Sen. Alan Lowenthal’s office since July 6 to work out their differences, posted a “let’s work together” call to the state senator just prior to SB 974 (Lowenthal’s $30 port container fee bill) being taken off suspense (courtesy of Assembly Speaker Nunez) and passing through Assembly Appropriations.
However, just yesterday, MAV – the “man who never learns” -- made one of those, “So is it yes or is it no to my bridges?” calls to Lowenthal, who, by all appearances, told the Mayor to go pound sand at one of the nearby port-polluted beaches.
Now, wacky environmentalists have gone even wackier as word has it that the Governator (perhaps with port issues it’s better to call him the “Terminal-ator”) has reportedly stepped in and reached out to Sen. Don Perata and Lowenthal, asking for some time to smooth out the bill for the businessfolk -- who enjoy talking about working with the public as long as it doesn’t cost them a dime.
After the major screw up of recently firing the Air Resources Board Chairman for being too independent/aggressive in the global warming wars, The Terminal-ator knows his green credentials can’t take another international media hit. But, for some reason, this action hero wants to postpone action until the new year.
Sources say the wacky enviros are willing to maintain a hard line and “check everyone’s green credentials” from MAV to the Gov to the Assembly. But remember, they ARE called environmentalists…
This has the makings of a fine melodrama – or a media bloodbath somewhere along the line.
So…stay tuned for the next episode.
Will the mayor EVER learn?
Will the Terminal-ator, after selling infrastructure bonds to the public, get the tightwads at the California Chamber of Commerce to kick in a few bucks for the asthmatic kids?
Can the wacky environmentalists ever trust a “green” Governor who fired an independent air board chair for trying to “do too much” in the battle against global warming?
OR will they roll over until the new year only to jump off MAV’s new bridges?
Posted by numan @ 9/05/2007 02:42:00 PM
22 Comments:
My vote is for these idiot environmentalists and the mayor to jump off the bridge together. There are a lot of jobs at stake and the "enviros" don't care about our livlihoods. Hopefully, they will take the city council and DWP and illegal aliens with them.
4:01:
Right, in other words, "I don't care how many people have to die, as long as I make my money."
Or, in the case of our esteemed Mayor, "As long as I get elected to my next political office."
That's what has made LA such a great place to live, especially in the Diesel Death Zone.
4:38 Dumbass Clown, the California Chamber of Commerce lists this bill as a "job killer." There's good reason for that because you are taxing goods that are coming in, making them more expensive for everybody!
4:38:
Call all the names you want, but the truth remains. You can have a "job killer bill", or you can just go on with a "people killer industry".
A $60 per container fee amounts to less than half a cent on a pair of tennis shoes. Do you think that will change anyone's buying behavior down at Wal Mart?
The California Chamber of Commerce calls anything that might cost them some money a "job killer" bill. They particularly don't give a damn how many people have to die for their profits.
The costs to the public of the pollution related sickness and death are in the billions of dollars a year. If that cost was placed where it belongs, on the cost of the "goods", maybe we could actually compete with China to manufacture something in the US again.
The California Air Resources Board said that the residents around the ports, and along the goods movement corridors, are subsidizing the industry with their health. I'm sick of it.
Just got news through the "wacky enviro" grapevine (nice one, S.S. Sam...) that Lowenthal and the Governor just made a deal and the bill is going to be a two-year bill. No word on the mayor's involvement.
Jack:
Great. Another year to "Eat Diesel and Die", as our blogger friends here used to say.
The USC School of Medicine did a study on diesel exhaust on the freeway. They followed trucks and measured the particulate levels.
They found that your cancer risk behind a diesel truck is 17 times higher than if you are driving in "clean" air.
Think about that next time you go up the 710. Or see the black plume from a locomotive. Or see a ship sailing down the coast. A ship is the equivalent of about 6000 trucks.
http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/sen/sb_0951-1000/sb_974_bill_20070524_amended_sen_v96.html
That's a huge chunk of money for the California Transportation
Commission and the State Air Resources Board to allocate. The moneys will be collected from container owners after counting containers passing through Port of Los Angeles and Port of Oakland.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Los_Angeles
For Port of LA alone, per year
(Annual container volume 7.3 million TEUs (FY 2005)) times $30 per TEU equals $21.9 million.
Assume Port of Oakland is something similar then this fund is about $40 million per year.
Who knows what they'll actually do with the money (if the bill passes). But, the money is suppose to go to air quality improvement and transportation improvement.
Job killer, no way. Got em by the balls. There's no better, cost effective way to transport their goods. They'll have to pay.
My bet is the good guys, the environs won't win.
Two years? Are you kidding? That won't be enough to cover political overhead.
Someone's pushing for big improvements at or around the ports, probably security related. Environs are probably just trying to get a cut (they'll get screwed, though).
Well Mr. SS Sam Taylor, wait until you need help from those wacky enviros. (and you know that time will come)
We might tell you to suck our asses.
5:19, your comment, "Who knows what they'll actually do with the money (if the bill passes). But, the money is suppose to go to air quality improvement and transportation improvement." actually speaks volumes.
Witness what just occurred when our State elected officials finally passed the State Budget: The voters passed a transportation improvement bond measure, and our "esteemed legislators" decided to divert the money from this fund to help balance the budget.
Your first sentence hit the nail squarely on the head. I can just imagine what they will do with the money when the next budget comes up for a vote!
Per the Press Telegram looks like the bill is dead for now, pulled by Lowenthal at the request of Arnold.
This was probably a bad move by Lowenthal. A lot can happen between now and January. Schwarzeneggar screwed the teachers and it took two years for them to get back the education funds. He is as green as a moldy cupcake the week after St. Patrick's Day.
11:53 PM:
Amen.
11:53, Agreed. Bad move by Lowenthal, worse move by Villaraigosa. His enviro base is fleeing for the hills. I can't think of one enviro who is excited about this guy any more.
The day will come when the dead will bear witness to the greed and political ambition which drive this city and state.
Those who have sacrificed them on the altar of their own personal agendas will then be judged and called to account.
I hope you think about it in the dark watches of the night.
That day may be September 26th. Results of a first-time ever port health/cancer survey in the Wilmington area are supposed to be presented to the media. I hope this is a gross exaggeration but, according to one participant, "Everybody has cancer."
I'm having a hard time believing that Lowenthal made a bad move.
A veto is a veto and you have to get the governor's signature. At least the bill is resurrected in January.
What is sad to me is that I somehow feel more represented -- better represented -- by the state senator from Long Beach than I do by the Mayor of Los Angeles.
For the Mayor to 11th hour this whole thing is politics at its very worst and completely disingenuous. For him and his office to piddle around and not even return a call to Lowenthal since July 6th? That's an honorable move by our progressive mayor? Did he honor our city council and their representative voice? Is his iPhone in the shop?
The Mayor did not represent the people on this one. He is about as far off track as I think any of us would have -- make that "could have" -- believed.
Jack:
Absolutely, totally, 100% right.
I'm with Jack and Anon. Does this mayor have any environmentalists who work for him? Anybody? Or are they clammed up and will all leave the mayors office eventually?
Why does the mayor even pretend to be green? We know that his Riordan staff was not known to be green when they worked for him. Why the change of heart? Or not as it appears.
Funny you should say that Anon. Today's Southern Sierran talks about how green the Mayor is and how much the Sierra Club loves him and how lucky we are that he appointed David Nahai and Mary Nichols. I do agree with those two appointments. But two good environmental appointments don't make a green mayor.
8:19 PM:
Tony appointed Mary Nichols? I thought it was Arnold.
Reminds me of some blogger's brilliant comment about Arnold earlier in the week:
"Green as a moldy St. Patrick's Day cupcake."
Works for Tony too.
Antonio appointed Mary Nichols to the DWP board when she was the head of the Environmental Department at UCLA.
Arnold just appointed her to the air board.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home